ArticlePDF Available

Eccentric resistance training increases and retains maximal strength, muscle endurance, and hypertrophy in trained men

Canadian Science Publishing
Applied Physiology Nutrition and Metabolism
Authors:

Abstract and Figures

The aim of the present study was to evaluate the effects of different resistance training protocols on muscle strength, endurance, and hypertrophy after training and detraining. Thirty-four resistance-trained males were randomized in concentric-only (CONC), eccentric-only (ECC), traditional concentric–eccentric (TRAD) bench press resistance training or control group. The training volume was equalized among the intervention groups. Bench press of 1-repetition maximum (1RM)/body mass, maximum number of repetitions (MNR), and chest circumference were evaluated at the baseline, after 6 weeks of training, and after 6 weeks of detraining. All intervention groups reported significant 1RM/body mass increases after training (CONC baseline: 1.04 ± 0.06, post-training: 1.12 ± 0.08, p < 0.05; ECC baseline: 1.08 ± 0.04, post-training: 1.15 ± 0.05, p < 0.05; TRAD baseline: 1.06 ± 0.08, post-training: 1.11 ± 0.10, p < 0.05). After detraining, only ECC retained 1RM/body mass above the baseline (1.17 ± 0.07, p < 0.05), while CONC and TRAD returned to baseline values. Only ECC improved and retained MNR (baseline: 22 ± 3; post-training: 25 ± 3, and post-detraining: 25 ± 4, p < 0.05 compared with baseline) and chest circumference (baseline: 98.3 ± 2.4 cm, post-training: 101.7 ± 2.2 cm and post-detraining: 100.7 ± 2.3 cm. p < 0.05 compared with baseline), while no significant changes occurred in both CONC and TRAD. The incorporation of eccentric training can be recommended for counteracting the negative effects of detraining or forced physical inactivity.
This content is subject to copyright. Terms and conditions apply.
ARTICLE
Eccentric resistance training increases and retains maximal
strength, muscle endurance, and hypertrophy in trained men
Giuseppe Coratella and Federico Schena
Abstract: The aim of the present study was to evaluate the effects of different resistance training protocols on muscle strength,
endurance, and hypertrophy after training and detraining. Thirty-four resistance-trained males were randomized in concentric-
only (CONC), eccentric-only (ECC), traditional concentric–eccentric (TRAD) bench press resistance training or control group. The
training volume was equalized among the intervention groups. Bench press of 1-repetition maximum (1RM)/body mass, maxi-
mum number of repetitions (MNR), and chest circumference were evaluated at the baseline, after 6 weeks of training, and after
6 weeks of detraining. All intervention groups reported significant 1RM/body mass increases after training (CONC baseline: 1.04 ±
0.06, post-training: 1.12 ± 0.08, p< 0.05; ECC baseline: 1.08 ± 0.04, post-training: 1.15 ± 0.05, p< 0.05; TRAD baseline: 1.06 ± 0.08,
post-training: 1.11 ± 0.10, p< 0.05). After detraining, only ECC retained 1RM/body mass above the baseline (1.17 ± 0.07, p< 0.05),
while CONC and TRAD returned to baseline values. Only ECC improved and retained MNR (baseline: 22 ± 3; post-training: 25 ± 3,
and post-detraining: 25 ± 4, p< 0.05 compared with baseline) and chest circumference (baseline: 98.3 ± 2.4 cm, post-training:
101.7 ± 2.2 cm and post-detraining: 100.7 ± 2.3 cm. p< 0.05 compared with baseline), while no significant changes occurred in both
CONC and TRAD. The incorporation of eccentric training can be recommended for counteracting the negative effects of
detraining or forced physical inactivity.
Key words: bench press, 1RM, maximum number of repetitions, detraining, chest circumference, strength endurance.
Résumé : Cette étude a pour objectif d’évaluer les effets de divers protocoles d’entraînement contre résistance sur la force
musculaire, l’endurance et l’hypertrophie, et ce, a
`la suite d’un entraînement et d’un désentraînement. On répartit aléatoire-
ment 34 hommes entraînés contre résistance dans quatre groupes : développé-couché en miométrie (« CONC »), en pliométrie
(« ECC »), miométrie-pliométrie classique (« TRAD ») et contrôle (« CONC »). On égalise le volume d’entraînement d’un groupe a
`
l’autre. On évalue répétition maximale (« 1RM »)/masse corporelle au développé-couché, le nombre maximal de répétitions
(« MNR ») et le tour de poitrine au début, après 6 semaines d’entraînement et après 6 semaines de désentraînement. Après les
6 semaines d’entraînement, tous les groupes a
`l’entraînement présentent une augmentation significative de 1RM/masse corpo-
relle (CONC début : 1,04 ± 0,06, après l’entraînement : 1,12 ± 0,08, p< 0,05; ECC début : 1,08 ± 0,04, après l’entraînement : 1,15 ±
0,05, p< 0,05; TRAD début : 1,06 ± 0,08, post : 1,11 ± 0,10, p< 0,05). Après la période de désentraînement, seul le groupe ECC
présente un 1RM/masse corporelle au-dessus de la valeur au départ (1,17 ± 0,07, p< 0,05), les groupes CONC et TRAD reviennent
aux valeurs du départ. Seul le groupe ECC améliore et maintient le MNR (début : 22 ± 3; après l’entraînement : 25 ± 3; après le
désentraînement : 25 ± 4, p< 0,05 comparativement au début) et le tour de poitrine (début : 98,3 ± 2,4 cm; après l’entraînement :
101,7 ± 2,2 cm et après le désentraînement : 100,7 ± 2,3 cm, p< 0,05 comparativement au début); dans les groupes CONC et TRAD,
on ne note aucune modification significative. On pourrait recommander l’intégration de l’entraînement en pliométrie pour
contrer les effets négatifs du désentraînement ou de l’inactivité physique forcée. [Traduit par la Rédaction]
Mots-clés : développé-couché, 1RM, nombre maximal de répétitions, désentraînement, tour de poitrine, endurance a
`la force.
Introduction
Resistance training is a great stimulus for increasing muscle
strength and hypertrophy. Traditional resistance training proto-
cols use consecutive eccentric–concentric cycles. However, the
importance of the eccentric phase for increasing muscle strength
was previously highlighted (Dudley et al. 1991). Furthermore, a
meta-analysis showed that eccentric-only versus concentric-only
training induced greater total strength (i.e., the sum of concentric,
isometric, and eccentric peak torque) and muscle hypertrophy
adaptations (Roig et al. 2009). However, the studies considered in
the meta-analysis used different training devices (e.g., isokinetic
dynamometer or dynamic constant external resistance), such as
different training-load volumes. Particularly, matching the differ-
ent training protocols for the session load volume (Coratella et al.
2015a) could help trainers to discriminate the effectiveness of
each training modality. Indeed, when the total work was matched,
similar increases in muscle strength and hypertrophy resulted
after concentric-only versus eccentric-only resistance training (Moore
et al. 2012). In addition, similar relative exercise loads (80% of
concentric vs. eccentric 1-repetition maximum (1RM)), resulted in
similar increases in muscle volume (Franchi et al. 2014). There-
fore, as recently reviewed (LaStayo et al. 2014), the role of exercise
modality for increasing the muscle size remains controversial. In
addition, while eccentric-only and concentric-only based training
protocols have been compared (see (Roig et al. 2009) for a detailed
meta-analysis), the most used method in the field, i.e., traditional
eccentric–concentric exercise, has been rarely compared.
Functional performance improvements are often related to
strength training adaptations. The maximum number of repeti-
Received 6 June 2016. Accepted 8 August 2016.
G. Coratella and F. Schena. Department of Neurological, Biomedical and Movement Science, University of Verona, via Casorati 43, 37131, Verona, Italy.
Corresponding author: Giuseppe Coratella (email: giuseppe.coratella@univr.it.).
Copyright remains with the author(s) or their institution(s). Permission for reuse (free in most cases) can be obtained from RightsLink.
1184
Appl. Physiol. Nutr. Metab. 41: 1184–1189 (2016) dx.doi.org/10.1139/apnm-2016-0321 Published at www.nrcresearchpress.com/apnm on 12 August 2016.
Appl. Physiol. Nutr. Metab. Downloaded from www.nrcresearchpress.com by Giuseppe Coratella on 11/14/16
For personal use only.
tions performed using submaximal load has been previously mea-
sured for indicating muscle endurance (Maia et al. 2014;Walker
et al. 2013). Previous studies showed that strength training in-
creased the maximum number of repetitions (Ribeiro et al. 2014;
Walker et al. 2013). The maximum number of repetitions involves
both metabolic (Mujika and Padilla, 2001) and neural adaptations
(Smilios et al. 2010). Compared with concentric-only, the eccentric-only
exercise resulted in greater cortical activation (Fang et al. 2004)
and greater metabolic efficiency (Vogt and Hoppeler 2014). It is
conceivable that the different neural and metabolic engagements
in concentric-only, eccentric-only, or traditional concentric–eccentric
exercises could lead to different adaptations in muscle endurance.
However, to our knowledge, no direct comparison concurrently
investigated the effects of different resistance exercise modalities
on muscle endurance.
The cessation of training (i.e., detraining) is linked to decreases
in both physiological and functional muscle characteristics. Pre-
vious studies showed that traditional resistance training retained
maximal strength increases (Correa et al. 2013;Fatouros et al.
2005). Similarly, previous studies showed that both eccentric-only
(Housh et al. 1996a) and concentric-only (Housh et al. 1996b) resis-
tance training protocols both increased and retained maximal
strength. The mechanisms underlying the muscle strength, hy-
pertrophy, and endurance retention could depend on both neural
(Fang et al. 2004) and cellular (Bruusgaard et al. 2010) factors.
Eccentric-only exercise is known to induce muscle damage and to
confer muscle protection (i.e., the repeated bout effect) (Coratella
and Bertinato 2015). Such a long-lasting protection involved de-
layed extra-cellular matrix adaptations, which can be partially
responsible even for the retention of the training-induced adap-
tations (Hyldahl et al. 2015).
The bench press is one of the most common and effective exercises
for increasing upper body strength and hypertrophy. Although the
bench press involves several upper body muscles, increases in the
size of the chest muscles is one of the main training-induced adap-
tations (Yasuda et al. 2010). In addition, the chest circumference, the
upper arms cross-sectional area and the percentage of fat are all
predictors for the bench press 1RM and they can be used as indirect
markers of muscle hypertrophy (Mayhew et al. 1991). Among these
aforementioned markers, the chest circumference is the most easily
assessable in field, as it does not require the use of laboratory devices
or sophisticated formulas.
Several athletes or amateurs incorporate resistance training in
their workouts. The bench press is included in most strength or
fitness programs, traditionally exercised in concentric–eccentric
protocols. However, the concentric-only or eccentric-only training
protocols are rarely performed within a field-based context, while
they have been largely investigated in laboratory settings. There-
fore, the primary aim of the present study was to evaluate the
retention of maximal strength, maximum number of repetitions,
and chest circumference adaptations after 6 weeks of detraining
subsequent to concentric-only, eccentric-only, or traditional concentric-
eccentric bench press training in resistance-trained men. The
secondary aim was to evaluate if the training-induced changes
depend on the exercise modalities. In the first instance, it has
been conceived that eccentric-only training can successfully re-
tain the training-induced adaptations. In addition, it has been
conceived that despite the different training modalities, the matched-
volume protocols can lead to similar training-induced adaptations.
Materials and methods
Study design
This study was a parallel, 4-groups, pre-/post-training, random-
ized controlled trial. Using a restricted blocked randomization
(computer-generated sequence), the participants were random-
ized into 4 groups: concentric-only (CONC), eccentric-only (ECC),
traditional concentric–eccentric training (TRAD) and control group
(CON). One of the researchers without any contact or knowledge of
the participants completed the allocation and randomization of
groups. Therefore, no allocation concealment mechanisms were
necessary.
Procedures
The present investigation lasted 15 weeks. Participants were
evaluated at week 1, week 8, and week 15. The intervention period
lasted from week 2 to week 7 and the detraining period from
week 9 to week 14. During both training and detraining, partici-
pants were asked to refrain from any other form of strenuous
physical activity. In addition, the detraining period corresponded
to the summer holidays, to avoid as much as possible any chance
of training. On a weekly basis, the operators reminded partici-
pants to avoid any other form of resistance training for the entire
period of the study. Both training and testing sessions were as-
sessed using a flat bench press (Technogym, Cesena, Italy).
Participants
Thirty-four healthy, resistance-trained, sport-science student
males with a minimum of 3 years of experience in resistance
training (age: 26 ± 3.7 years; body mass: 85.4 ± 11.4 kg; height 1.83 ±
0.11 m) volunteered for this study. We included only males who
were able to perform a bench press 1RM equal or greater than
their body-mass (Table 1). Upper joint diseases as well as muscular
injuries were considered as exclusion criteria. In addition, we
excluded males who regularly used supplementation in the pre-
vious 3 months. The participants signed a written informed con-
sensus, which described the procedures in detail, and the Ethics
Committee of the University of Verona approved the present
study.
Intervention
The training volume load was equalized among the 3 interven-
tion groups. We matched the repetition number, the training load
(considered as percentage of 1RM), and the time under tension was
3 s and it was equal for each phase (concentric or eccentric)
(McBride et al. 2009). Therefore, for each training session, ECC
performed 5 sets × 6 repetitions at 120% of 1RM; CONC performed
6 sets × 7 repetitions at 85% of 1RM; TRAD performed 4 sets ×
5 repetitions at 90% of 1RM at the bench press, while CON did not
train. During each repetition performed in ECC, 2 operators lifted
the bar to relieve each participant from the concentric phase
(Coratella et al. 2015b). Similarly, 2 operators lowered the bar dur-
ing each repetition performed in CONC to relieve each participant
from the eccentric phase (Housh et al. 1996b). Participants in
TRAD performed both phases without the help of any operator.
Table 1. Anthropometric and performance characteristics at baseline are reported for each group.
Body
mass (kg) Height (m) 1RM (kg) 1RM/body mass
Maximum
Nrepetitions
Chest
circumference
ECC 86.6±14.3 1.84±0.09 93.8±18.3 1.08±0.04 22.1±3.2 98.3±5.6
CONC 84.6±8.2 1.82±0.08 88.6±9.9 1.05±0.06 25.4±3.8 101.2±5.0
TRAD 84.4±14.2 23.9±4.2 88.7±12.4 1.04±0.08 24.0±4.7 102.8±10.2
CON 86.1±9.2 26.1±4.9 89.0±6.2 1.04±0.06 24.4±3.2 98.3±5.6
Note: No significant between-group difference was found. 1RM, 1-repetition maximum; CON, control; CONC,
concentric-only; ECC, eccentric-only; TRAD, traditional concentric–eccentric.
Coratella and Schena 1185
Published by NRC Research Press
Appl. Physiol. Nutr. Metab. Downloaded from www.nrcresearchpress.com by Giuseppe Coratella on 11/14/16
For personal use only.
Each set was separated by 3 min of passive recovery. The interven-
tion lasted 6 weeks, twice a week, for a total of 12 sessions. Each
session was separated by at least 2 days. After the post-training
testing session, participants did not train for 6 weeks.
To keep the exercise technique similar among the participants,
participants were instructed to exercise using the same relative
bar handgrips distance. Therefore, hands were placed on the bar
at a distance that facilitated approximately a 90° angle between
arms and forearms, when the bar is on the chest, approximately
one-half length of sternum.
Bench press 1RM/body mass
The bench press 1RM was tested on a gym device (Flat bench
press, Technogym, Cesena, Italy). The testing protocol started with a
standardized warm-up, consisting of 2 sets × 15 repetitions with a
load equal to 50% of the person’s body mass. This protocol was
based on the following formula (Brzycki 1993):
predicted 1RM load/1.0278 (0.0278 · n)
where the load is in kg, the 90% of the predicted 1RM was used as
an initial 1RM attempt, and nis the number of executed repeti-
tions. Afterwards, additional load of 2.5 kg was added until sub-
jects failed to lift the bar. Two minutes of passive recovery separated
each trial. Each participant received standardized encourage-
ments by the operators. Bench press 1RM/body mass was recorded
and analyzed.
Bench press maximum number of repetitions
Based on 1RM measurements, after 60 min of passive rest, par-
ticipants performed a single set up to failure of bench press at 50%
of their previously recorded 1RM. They were instructed to main-
tain the time under tension equal to 1.5 s for both concentric and
eccentric phases. A visual chronometer feedback was provided to
help the participants to maintain the proper repetition pace. The
task ended when participants failed to properly lift the bar for
2 consecutive repetitions within the set time under tension. Op-
erator provided standardized encouragements to each participant.
Chest circumferences
The participants stood with arms slightly abducted, permitting
the tape to be passed around the chest. The chest girth was mea-
sured at the level of mesosternal. The measurement was taken at
the end of normal respiration (Stewart et al. 2001). Each measure-
ment was repeated twice and the mean was inserted in data anal-
ysis. If the 2 measures differed by more than 5%, a third measurement
was performed. Same operator performed all measurements.
Statistical analysis
The statistical analysis was performed using IBM SPSS (version
20.0; IBM Corp., Armonk, N.Y., USA). The normality of the distri-
bution was analyzed using Shapiro–Wilk test. The sphericity as-
sumption was analyzed using the Mauchly test. Test–retest reliability
was measured using Cronback-index. The variations of the de-
pendent parameters (bench press 1RM/body mass, maximum
number of repetition and chest circumference) were analyzed
using mixed-factorial repeated measures ANOVA (time × group).
Post hoc analysis using Bonferroni’s correction was then per-
formed to calculate main effect for group (4 levels: ECC, CONC,
TRAD, and CON) and time (3 levels: baseline, post-training, and
after detraining). Significance was set at p< 0.05. Data are re-
ported as means ± SD and change scores are reported with confi-
dence interval (CI) 95% and
2
.
Results
Bench press 1RM/body mass
A time × group interaction (p< 0.001) was found for the bench
press 1RM/body-mass. There was a main effect for time (p< 0.001)
and a trend (p= 0.055) for group. Post hoc analysis showed 1RM/
body-mass increases over time from baseline to post-training in
CONC (0.07 ± 0.01, CI95% 0.04 to 0.10, p< 0.001,
2
= 0.589), in ECC
(0.07 ± 0.01, CI95% 0.04 to 0.10, p< 0.001,
2
= 0.597), and in TRAD
(0.05 ± 0.01, CI95% 0.02 to 0.08, p= 0.001,
2
= 0.437) (Fig. 1).
However, 1RM/body mass increases remained greater than base-
line after detraining only in ECC (0.09 ± 0.01, CI95% 0.05 to 0.012,
p< 0.001,
2
= 0.698), while both CONC and TRAD returned to
values similar to baseline. CON did not show any change. No
between-group differences resulted at baseline. After training,
1RM/body mass resulted greater in ECC compared with CON (0.11 ±
0.04, CI95% 0.01 to 0.20, p= 0.027,
2
= 0.263). After detraining ECC
resulted in greater 1RM/body mass compared with CON (0.13 ±
0.04, CI95% 0.02 to 0.024, p= 0.011,
2
= 0.349) and to CONC (0.11 ±
0.04, CI95% 0.01 to 0.21, p= 0.034,
2
= 0.174) but not to TRAD,
(0.11 ± 0.04, CI95% –0.00 to 0.21, p= 0.058,
2
= 0.111).
Maximum number of repetitions
A time × group interaction (p= 0.042) was found for the bench
press maximum number of repetitions. There was a main effect
for time (p= 0.017), but not for group (p= 0.554). Post hoc analysis
showed increases over time from baseline to post-training only in
ECC (3.0 ± 0.7, CI95% 1.1 to 4.8, p= 0.001,
2
= 0.412) (Fig. 2), In
addition, such increases were retained after detraining compared
with baseline (3.1 ± 1.0, CI95% 0.5 to 5.6, p= 0.014,
2
= 0.304).
Neither CONC, TRAD, nor CON showed any change.
Chest circumference
Test–retest reliability resulted in a Cronbach-= 0.910. A time ×
group interaction (p= 0.014) was found for the chest circumfer-
ence. There was a main effect for time (p< 0.001) but not for group
(p= 0.471). Post hoc analysis showed increases over time from
baseline to post-training only in ECC (3.3 ± 0.6, CI95% 1.7 to 4.8,
p< 0.001,
2
= 0.488) (Fig. 3). The chest circumference remained
above the baseline in ECC after detraining (2.4 ± 0.6, CI95% 0.8 to
3.8, p= 0.001,
2
= 0.417). Neither CONC, TRAD, nor CON showed
any significant change.
Discussion
The present study investigated the effectiveness of different
bench press resistance training protocols on muscle strength, en-
Fig. 1. The time-course of bench press 1RM/BM is shown for each
intervention group. Compared with baseline, greater 1RM/BM resulted
in ECC, CONC, and TRAD post-training. After detraining, 1RM/BM
resulted significantly greater than baseline only in ECC; CONC, and
TRAD showed significant 1RM/BM decreases compared with post-training,
resulting in values similar to baseline. 1RM/BM, 1-repetition maximum/
body mass; CON, control; CONC, concentric-only; ECC, eccentric-only;
TRAD, traditional concentric–eccentric. *, p< 0.05; †, p< 0.05
compared with CON post-training; ‡, p< 0.05 compared with CONC
and CON detraining.
1186 Appl. Physiol. Nutr. Metab. Vol. 41, 2016
Published by NRC Research Press
Appl. Physiol. Nutr. Metab. Downloaded from www.nrcresearchpress.com by Giuseppe Coratella on 11/14/16
For personal use only.
durance, and hypertrophy increases and retention. The primary
outcomes highlighted that ECC was the only training modality
that preserved the increases in maximum strength after 6 weeks
of detraining in resistance-trained men. In addition, only ECC
improved and retained the maximum number of repetitions at
50% of 1RM and the chest circumference. Finally, all the training
protocols, matched for the volume load, similarly improved the
bench press 1RM/body mass in trained men.
The present outcomes highlighted that only ECC increased and
retained the bench press 1RM/body mass after detraining. The
superiority of the eccentric-only versus concentric-only or tradi-
tional resistance training in strength retention is debatable. The
importance of eccentric exercise for promoting the retention of
strength gains has been documented in literature. Eccentric-only
training was shown to be a great stimulus for retaining strength
increases (Housh et al. 1996a). In addition, knee extensors isokinetic
peak torque remained above the baseline values after 3 months
of detraining following 10 weeks of eccentric-only training (Blazevich
et al. 2007). Furthermore, after concentric-only training versus
traditional training, the detraining seemed to have a detrimental
effect for the strength gain resulted after the concentric-only
training (Dudley et al. 1991). However, other studies showed that
strength retention is not a peculiarity only of the eccentric-only
training. In the same above-mentioned study, the authors also
showed that concentric-only training was able to retain strength
increases after detraining (Blazevich et al. 2007). Similarly, the
knee extensors 1RM improvements induced by concentric-only
training were unaffected by 8 weeks of detraining (Housh et al.
1996b). In addition, traditional resistance training was shown to
be a proper stimulus for increasing the muscle strength and for
retaining it after detraining (Correa et al. 2013). Due to such mul-
tiplicity, it is not possible to state that the strength retention
could depend on the exercise performed during the training pe-
riod. However, our results seemed to confirm the superiority of
ECC compared to CONC and TRAD, in agreement with the studies
that supported the superiority of eccentric-only exercise.
The mechanisms underlying the overall strength retention are
not fully understood. A possible explanation could be that during
the training period, additional nuclei from the satellite cells are
added into the muscle fibres throughout the fusion process, stim-
ulating the increasing in protein synthesis (Bruusgaard et al.
2010). After the end of the training, such nuclei remained into the
muscle cell for at least 3 months. In such a way, the muscle is able
to develop a sort of “memory”, useful both to prevent atrophy
(and consequent decreases in strength) and to get quicker adapta-
tions after retraining (Bruusgaard et al. 2010). However, such
mechanism has been recently debated (Gundersen 2016) and it
cannot explain the greater strength retention that resulted in
ECC. The extra-cellular matrix can be defined as a bridge for the
transmission of force from the myofibres to the tendons (Grounds
et al. 2005). Interestingly, the extra-cellular matrix plasticity could
play a key role for the strength retention. While no difference in
collagens’ upregulation gene responses occurred after 4 days of
concentric-only versus eccentric-only short-term training (Heinemeier
et al. 2007a), a more recent study showed for the first time that the
extra-cellular collagens’ upregulation occurred 27 days (but not
2 days) after repeated eccentric-only exercise (Hyldahl et al. 2015).
It can be speculated that such a delayed stimulus could be par-
tially responsible for the strength retention that resulted only in
ECC. A further explanation involves neural adaptations. Neural
cortical adaptations have been suggested to be partly responsible
for strength retention, although the physiological training in-
duced changes could be dissipated (Gabriel et al. 2006). Compared
with concentric-only, eccentric-only exercise involves larger cor-
tical areas during maximal tasks (Fang et al. 2004). As hypothe-
sized by the same authors, increasing the neural control of the
eccentric exercise contributes to avoid muscle damage (Fang et al.
2004). Indeed, it is known that performing eccentric-only exercise
protects muscle from further damage following the first session
(Coratella and Bertinato 2015). The repeated bout effect can last up
to several months, during which participants did not train
(Nosaka et al. 2001). Therefore, it can be speculated that ECC could
be involved in greater and longer lasting neural cortical adapta-
tions. Finally, it has been shown that strength retention depends
on the intensity performed during the resistance training (Fatouros
et al. 2005). In addition, resistance training showed similar electro-
myography (EMG) signal increases after eccentric-only or concentric-
only isokinetic training (Carvalho et al. 2014). However, the same
authors observed more significant neural adaptations after eccentric-
only compared with concentric-only, probably depending on the
greater torque exerted during ECC. Although both TRAD and
CONC were exercised at high-intensity loads, the greater supramaximal-
intensity load performed in ECC could have favourably influenced
the strength retention. In summary, it can be speculated that the
strength retention, which resulted only in ECC, could depend on
both cellular and neural long-lasting adaptations.
Similarly to the previous data, only ECC showed increases in
chest circumference, which remained significantly above the
baseline after detraining. The anabolic effect of resistance train-
ing depends in first instance on its capacity to stimulate anabolic
Fig. 2. The time-course of maximum number (N) of repetitions is
shown for each intervention group. Post hoc comparison showed
that only ECC increased and retained maximum number of
repetitions after both post-training and detraining compared with
baseline. CON, control; CONC, concentric-only; ECC, eccentric-only;
TRAD, traditional concentric–eccentric. *, p< 0.05.
Fig. 3. The time-course of chest circumference is shown for each
intervention group. Post hoc comparison showed that only ECC increased
and chest circumference after both post-training and detraining
compared with baseline. CON, control; CONC, concentric-only; ECC,
eccentric-only; TRAD, traditional concentric–eccentric. *, p< 0.05.
Coratella and Schena 1187
Published by NRC Research Press
Appl. Physiol. Nutr. Metab. Downloaded from www.nrcresearchpress.com by Giuseppe Coratella on 11/14/16
For personal use only.
hormones such as growth hormone or bioavailable testosterone.
However, the postexercise elevation in hormones is still debatable
and their role still remains to be proved (Schoenfeld 2013). It has
been showed that traditional versus enhanced-eccentric resis-
tance exercise (Yarrow et al. 2007) or short-term training (Yarrow
et al. 2008) led to a similar growth hormone and bioavailable blood
concentration increases in untrained men. However, enhanced-
eccentric training resulted in lower volume load compared with
the traditional protocol (Yarrow et al. 2008). Therefore, similar GH
and BT serum concentrations were found with different load vol-
umes. It can be speculated that equalizing the load volume could
have resulted in a greater anabolic response in ECC. However, it
remains to be proved. In addition, greater insulin-like growth
factor and mechano-growth factor gene expressions were induced
by eccentric-only compared with concentric-only short-term training
(Heinemeier et al. 2007a). Similarly, the same abovementioned
authors found decreases in muscle myostatin messenger RNA after
eccentric-only versus concentric-only training (Heinemeier et al.
2007b). Conversely, comparing eccentric-only versus concentric-
only training, other studies did not show any differences in pro-
tein synthetic response (Franchi et al. 2015) or protein kinase B
and p70 s6 kinase (Cuthbertson et al. 2006) gene expressions. In
addition, it is well known that the aforementioned mechanisms
can last up to several weeks after the end of the training (Bruusgaard
et al. 2010). Therefore, the possible mechanisms underlying the
different hypertrophy responses and retention induced by eccentric-
only versus concentric-only or traditional training modalities are
still controversial.
The maximum number of repetitions exercised at 50% 1RM in-
creased after ECC training and it remained above the baseline
level after detraining. Focusing on the detraining, it has been
shown that the central neural drive is reduced within a fatiguing
strength-endurance task (Walker et al. 2012). In addition, during a
submaximal task, the EMG activity increases for maintaining the
demanded power output, with a reduction in efficiency (Smilios
et al. 2010). Finally, the eccentric contraction resulted in larger
cortical activation (Fang et al. 2004). Therefore, it can be specu-
lated that ECC could have led to an increased and longer lasting
neural drive, which can also result in a greater efficiency turned
into a later fatigue. Furthermore, compared with the maximal
strength, the maximum number of repetition depends also on
metabolic and energetic factors. The enzymatic activity, the mus-
cle capillarization, the mitochondrial ATP production, the muscle
fibre characteristics, and the myoglobin concentration are all in-
volved in the enhancement or the detriment of the submaximal
continuous force production (Mujika and Padilla, 2001). While
several studies showed a greater number of maximum repetitions
after strength training using different traditional exercise proto-
cols (Ribeiro et al. 2014;Maia et al. 2014;Walker et al. 2013), it is
not proven if the intensity or the contraction modality exercised
during the training could influence it. It can be speculated that
ECC could have improved the mechanical efficiency and conse-
quently the muscle endurance (Vogt and Hoppeler 2014). To our
knowledge, no study concurrently compared the retention of the
maximum number of repetitions in response to different resis-
tance training modalities. Hence, it is hypothesized that both
neural and metabolic stimuli could be involved in both increasing
and specially retaining the maximum number of repetitions.
The present outcomes showed similar training-induced strength
increases after all type of intervention. The greater effectiveness
of eccentric-only versus concentric-only training has already been
reviewed (Roig et al. 2009). However, the studies selected for the
meta-analysis used different session intensities or volume. In ad-
dition, traditional resistance training is also known to be effective
for promoting strength increases (Correa et al. 2013). However, the
volume load plays a key role in the strength training-induced
adaptations (Franchi et al. 2014). Therefore, although there were
different exercise modalities and intensities used in the present
study, it is confirmed that similar volume loads induced similar
adaptations (Coratella et al. 2015a).
The present investigation appears to include some limitations.
First, we matched the training volume among the intervention
groups using the volume load method (i.e., repetitions × external
load (kg)). Total work (i.e., force (N) × displacement (m)) is the most
appropriate method to quantify resistance exercise volume, al-
though it is acknowledged that it is not easy to assess (McBride
et al. 2009). However, the same authors stated that the major
limitations of volume load occur when external load is absent,
(e.g., power exercise protocols) and when time under tension is
not taken in account. By equalizing the time under tension (3 s for
concentric and eccentric phases), the volume load could be a rea-
sonable alternative to total work. Second, we did not record the
nutritional intake during the entire investigation period. Even if
nonsignificant body mass changes occurred, it may have con-
founded the results. Third, we did not record muscle damage
markers. Exercise-induced muscle damage could have impaired
the participant’s capacity to properly perform the resistance
training, particularly in the first training sessions. However, a
previous study showed that resistance-trained men were slightly
affected by muscle damage occurring after the bench press exer-
cise (Meneghel et al. 2014). Therefore, we are confident that all
training sessions were properly performed. Fourth, detecting the
EMG signal can provide news insight the muscle activity adapta-
tions after training and particularly detraining. Finally, we tested
the strength changes using concentric 1RM. It is acknowledged
that such a test could not be specific for the eccentric-only exer-
cise, as the eccentric-1RM could be. Therefore, the lack of between-
groups differences in strength training-induced adaptations could
possibly depend also on a nonspecific eccentric test.
In summary, we showed that ECC was the only resistance pro-
tocol able to retain the strength increases after 6 weeks of detrain-
ing in resistance trained men. In addition, only ECC increased and
preserved the maximum number of repetitions and the chest
circumference.
Conflict of interest statement
The authors declare that there are no conflict of interest.
Acknowledgements
Authors are grateful to all participants that volunteered for this
study. Authors want to thank Andrea Bertinato BSc for his pre-
cious help in data collection.
References
Blazevich, A.J., Cannavan, D., Coleman, D.R., and Horne, S. 2007. Influence of
concentric and eccentric resistance training on architectural adaptation in
human quadriceps muscles. J. Appl. Physiol. 103(5): 1565–1575. doi:10.1152/
japplphysiol.00578.2007. PMID:17717119.
Bruusgaard, J.C., Johansen, I.B., Egner, I.M., Rana, Z.A., and Gundersen, K. 2010.
Myonuclei acquired by overload exercise precede hypertrophy and are not
lost on detraining. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. 107(34): 15111–15116. doi:10.1073/pnas.
0913935107. PMID:20713720.
Brzycki, M. 1993. Strength TestingPredicting a One-Rep Max from Reps-to-
Fatigue. J. Phisical Educ. Recreat. Danc. 68: 88–90. doi:10.1080/07303084.1993.
10606684. PMID:26394649.
Carvalho, A., Caserotti, P., Carvalho, C., Abade, E., and Sampaio, J. 2014. Effect of
a Short Time Concentric Versus Eccentric Training Program on Electromyog-
raphy Activity and Peak Torque of Quadriceps. J. Hum. Kinet. 41(6): 5–13.
doi:10.2478/hukin-2014-0027. PMID:25114726.
Coratella, G., and Bertinato, L. 2015. Isoload vs isokinetic eccentric exercise: a
direct comparison of exercise-induced muscle damage and repeated bout
effect. Sport Sci. Health, 11(1): 87–96. doi:10.1007/s11332-014-0213-x.
Coratella, G., Milanese, C., and Schena, F. 2015a. Unilateral eccentric resistance
training: a direct comparison between isokinetic and dynamic constant ex-
ternal resistance modalities. Eur. J. Sport Sci. 15(8): 720–726. doi:10.1080/
17461391.2015.1060264. PMID:26289478.
Coratella, G., Milanese, C., and Schena, F. 2015b. Cross-education effect after
unilateral eccentric-only isokinetic vs dynamic constant external resistance
training. Sport Sci. Health, 11(3): 329–335. doi:10.1007/s11332-015-0244-y.
Correa, C.S., Baroni, B.M., Radaelli, R., Lanferdini, F.J., Cunha, G. dos S.,
Reischak-Oliveira, Á., et al. 2013. Effects of strength training and detraining
1188 Appl. Physiol. Nutr. Metab. Vol. 41, 2016
Published by NRC Research Press
Appl. Physiol. Nutr. Metab. Downloaded from www.nrcresearchpress.com by Giuseppe Coratella on 11/14/16
For personal use only.
on knee extensor strength, muscle volume and muscle quality in elderly
women. Age (Dordr). 35(5): 1899–1904. doi:10.1007/s11357-012-9478-7. PMID:
23014987.
Cuthbertson, D.J., Babraj, J., Smith, K., Wilkes, E., Fedele, M.J., Esser, K., and
Rennie, M. 2006. Anabolic signaling and protein synthesis in human skeletal
muscle after dynamic shortening or lengthening exercise. Am. J. Physiol.
Endocrinol. Metab. 290(4): E731–E738. doi:10.1152/ajpendo.00415.2005. PMID:
16263770.
Dudley, G.A., Tesch, P.A., Miller, B.J., and Buchanan, P. 1991. Importance of
eccentric actions in performance adaptations to resistance training. Aviat.
Space. Environ. Med. 62(6): 543–50. PMID:1859341.
Fang, Y., Siemionow, V., Sahgal, V., Xiong, F., and Yue, G.H. 2004. Distinct brain
activation patterns for human maximal voluntary eccentric and concentric
muscle actions. Brain Res. 1023(2): 200–212. doi:10.1016/j.brainres.2004.07.
035. PMID:15374746.
Fatouros, I.G., Kambas, A., Katrabasas, I., Nikolaidis, K., Chatzinikolaou, A.,
Leontsini, D., and Taxildaris, K. 2005. Strength training and detraining ef-
fects on muscular strength, anaerobic power, and mobility of inactive older
men are intensity dependent. Br. J. Sports Med. 39(10): 776–780. doi:10.1136/
bjsm.2005.019117. PMID:16183776.
Franchi, M.V., Atherton, P.J., Reeves, N.D., Flück, M., Williams, J., Mitchell, W.K.,
et al. 2014. Architectural, functional and molecular responses to concentric
and eccentric loading in human skeletal muscle. Acta Physiol. (Oxf). 210(3):
642–654. doi:10.1111/apha.12225. PMID:24387247.
Franchi, M.V., Wilkinson, D.J., Quinlan, J.I., Mitchell, W.K., Lund, J.N., Williams, J.P.,
et al. 2015. Early structural remodeling and deuterium oxide-derived protein
metabolic responses to eccentric and concentric loading in human skeletal mus-
cle. Physiol. Rep. 3(11). doi:10.14814/phy2.12593. PMID:26564061.
Gabriel, D.A., Kamen, G., and Frost, G. 2006. Neural adaptations to resistive
exercise: Mechanisms and recommendations for training practices. Sport.
Med. 36(2): 133–149. doi:10.2165/00007256-200636020-00004. PMID:16464122.
Grounds, M.D., Sorokin, L., and White, J. 2005. Strength at the extracellular
matrix-muscle interface. Scand. J. Med. Sci. Sport. 15(6): 381–391. doi:10.1111/
j.1600-0838.2005.00467.x. PMID:16293150.
Gundersen, K. 2016. Muscle memory and a new cellular model for muscle atro-
phy and hypertrophy. J. Exp. Biol. 219(2): 235–242. doi:10.1242/jeb.124495.
PMID:26792335.
Heinemeier, K.M., Olesen, J.L., Haddad, F., Langberg, H., Kjaer, M., Baldwin, K.M.,
and Schjerling, P. 2007a. Expression of collagen and related growth factors in
rat tendon and skeletal muscle in response to specific contraction types.
J. Physiol. 582(3): 1303–1316. doi:10.1113/jphysiol.2007.127639. PMID:17540706.
Heinemeier, K.M., Olesen, J.L., Schjerling, P., Haddad, F., Langberg, H.,
Baldwin, K.M., and Kjaer, M. 2007b. Short-term strength training and the
expression of myostatin and IGF-I isoforms in rat muscle and tendon: differ-
ential effects of specific contraction types. J. Appl. Physiol. 102(2): 573–581.
doi:10.1152/japplphysiol.00866.2006. PMID:17038487.
Housh, T.J., Housh, D.J., Weir, J.P., and Weir, L.L. 1996a. Effects of eccentric-only
resistance training and detraining. Int. J. Sports Med. 17(2): 145–148. doi:10.
1055/s-2007-972823. PMID:8833718.
Housh, T.J., Housh, D.J., Weir, J.P., and Weir, L.L. 1996b. Effects of unilateral
concentric-only dynamic constant external resistance training. Int. J. Sports
Med. 17(5): 338–343. doi:10.1055/s-2007-972857. PMID:8858404.
Hyldahl, R.D., Nelson, B., Xin, L., Welling, T., Groscost, L., Hubal, M.J., et al. 2015.
Extracellular matrix remodeling and its contribution to protective adapta-
tion following lengthening contractions in human muscle. FASEB J. 29(7):
2894–2904. doi:10.1096/fj.14-266668. PMID:25808538.
LaStayo, P., Marcus, R., Dibble, L., Frajacomo, F., and Lindstedt, S. 2014. Eccentric
exercise in rehabilitation: safety, feasibility, and application. J. Appl. Physiol.
116(11): 1426–1434. doi:10.1152/japplphysiol.00008.2013. PMID:23823152.
Maia, M.F., Willardson, J.M., Paz, G.A., and Miranda, H. 2014. Effects of different
rest intervals between antagonist paired sets on repetition performance and
muscle activation. J. Strength Cond. Res. 28(9): 2529–2535. doi:10.1519/JSC.
0000000000000451. PMID:25148302.
Mayhew, J.L., Ball, T.E., Ward, T.E., Hart, C.L., and Arnold, M.D. 1991. Relation-
ships of structural dimensions to bench press strength in college males.
J. Sports Med. Phys. Fitness, 31(2): 135–41. PMID:1753717.
McBride, J.M., McCaulley, G.O., Cormie, P., Nuzzo, L.L., Cavill, M.J., and Triplett, N.T.
2009. Comparison of methods to quantify volume during resistance exercise.
J. Strength Cond. Res. 23(1): 106–110. doi:10.1519/JSC.0b013e31818efdfe. PMID:
19130641.
Meneghel, A.J., Verlengia, R., Crisp, A.H., Aoki, M.S., Nosaka, K., da Mota, G.R.,
and Lopes, C.R. 2014. Muscle damage of resistance-trained men after two
bouts of eccentric bench press exercise. J. Strength Cond. Res. 28(10): 2961–
2966. doi:10.1519/JSC.0000000000000494. PMID:24736774.
Moore, D.R., Young, M., and Phillips, S.M. 2012. Similar increases in muscle size
and strength in young men after training with maximal shortening or
lengthening contractions when matched for total work. Eur. J. Appl. Physiol.
112(4): 1587–1592. doi:10.1007/s00421-011-2078-x.PMID:21755358.
Mujika, I., and Padilla, S. 2001. Muscular characteristics of detraining in humans.
Med. Sci. Sports Exerc. 33: 1297–1303. doi:10.1097/00005768-200108000-00009.
PMID:11474330.
Nosaka, K., Sakamoto, K.E.I., Newton, M., and Sacco, P. 2001. How long does the
protective effect on eccentric exercise induced muscle damage last? Med. Sci.
Sport. Exerc. 33(9): 1490–1495. doi:10.1097/00005768-200109000-00011. PMID:
11528337.
Ribeiro, A.S., Avelar, A., Schoenfeld, B.J., Trindade, M.C.C., Ritti-Dias, R.M.,
Altimari, L.R., and Cyrino, E.S. 2014. Effect of 16 weeks of resistance training
on fatigue resistance in men and women. J. Hum. Kinet. 42: 165–174. doi:10.
2478/hukin-2014-0071. PMID:25414750.
Roig, M., O’Brien, K., Kirk, G., Murray, R., McKinnon, P., Shadgan, B., and
Reid, W.D. 2009. The effects of eccentric versus concentric resistance training
on muscle strength and mass in healthy adults: a systematic review with
meta-analysis. Br. J. Sports Med. 43(8): 556–568. doi:10.1136/bjsm.2008.051417.
PMID:18981046.
Schoenfeld, B.J. 2013. Postexercise hypertrophic adaptations: a reexamination of
the hormone hypothesis and its applicability to resistance training program
design. J. Strength Cond. Res. 27(6): 1720–1730. doi:10.1519/JSC.0b013e31828ddd53.
PMID:23442269.
Smilios, I., Häkkinen, K., and Tokmakidis, S.P. 2010. Power output and electro-
myographic activity during and after a moderate load muscular endurance
session. J. Strength Cond. Res. 24(8): 2122–2131. doi:10.1519/JSC.0b013e3181a5bc44.
PMID:19834352.
Stewart, A., Marfell-Jones, M., and Olds, T. 2001. International standards for
anthropometric assessment. International Society for the Advancement of
Kinanthropometry, Lower Hutt, New Zealand.
Vogt, M., and Hoppeler, H.H. 2014. Eccentric exercise: mechanisms and effects
when used as training regime or training adjunct. J. Appl. Physiol. 116(11):
1446–1454. doi:10.1152/japplphysiol.00146.2013. PMID:24505103.
Walker, S., Davis, L., Avela, J., and Häkkinen, K. 2012. Neuromuscular fatigue
during dynamic maximal strength and hypertrophic resistance loadings.
J. Electromyogr. Kinesiol. 22(3): 356–362. doi:10.1016/j.jelekin.2011.12.009. PMID:
22245619.
Walker, S., Hulmi, J.J., Wernbom, M., Nyman, K., Kraemer, W.J., Ahtiainen, J.P.,
and Häkkinen, K. 2013. Variable resistance training promotes greater fatigue
resistance but not hypertrophy versus constant resistance training. Eur. J.
Appl. Physiol. 113(9): 2233–2244. doi:10.1007/s00421-013-2653-4. PMID:23636698.
Yarrow, J.F., Borsa, P.A., Borst, S.E., Sitren, H.S., Stevens, B.R., and White, L.J.
2007. Neuroendocrine responses to an acute bout of eccentric-enhanced re-
sistance exercise. Med. Sci. Sports Exerc. 39(6): 941–947. doi:10.1097/mss.
0b013e318043a249. PMID:17545883.
Yarrow, J.F., Borsa, P.A., Borst, S.E., Sitren, H.S., Stevens, B.R., and White, L.J.
2008. Early-phase neuroendocrine responses and strength adaptations fol-
lowing eccentric enhanced resistance training. J. Strength Cond. Res. 22:
1205–1214. doi:10.1519/JSC.0b013e31816eb4a0. PMID:18545187.
Yasuda, T., Fujita, S., Ogasawara, R., Sato, Y., and Abe, T. 2010. Effects of low-
intensity bench press training with restricted arm muscle blood flow on
chest muscle hypertrophy: a pilot study. Clin. Physiol. Funct. Imaging, 30(5):
338–343. doi:10.1111/j.1475-097X.2010.00949.x. PMID:20618358.
Coratella and Schena 1189
Published by NRC Research Press
Appl. Physiol. Nutr. Metab. Downloaded from www.nrcresearchpress.com by Giuseppe Coratella on 11/14/16
For personal use only.
... A few studies investigated the long-term adaptation to resistance training for different types of muscle contraction. It was shown that the increased maximal torque after eccentric training persisted even after a 5-week detraining period, but this was not the case for concentric training [112]. In line with this finding, Coratella and Schena [112] showed that muscle strength was maintained after eccentric resistance training during a 6-week detraining period, but not after concentric training. ...
... It was shown that the increased maximal torque after eccentric training persisted even after a 5-week detraining period, but this was not the case for concentric training [112]. In line with this finding, Coratella and Schena [112] showed that muscle strength was maintained after eccentric resistance training during a 6-week detraining period, but not after concentric training. Coratella et al. [113] found that after 8 weeks of detraining, the increased isometric torque was maintained to a greater extent in the eccentric training group than in the concentric group. ...
... This heightened excitability contributes to more significant neuromuscular adaptation gains. In addition, neuromuscular adaptations induced by eccentric training can be maintained over a long period of detraining, which was not the case for other types of muscle contraction [112]. A greater training effect of eccentric training on the neuromuscular system may be explained by specific neural strategies employed by lengthening contraction to modify the extent of neural inhibition, leading to a significant improvement in neuromuscular function. ...
Article
Full-text available
The manipulation of training variables (e.g., contraction mode) to increase muscle strength is crucial for athletic performance and clinical rehabilitation. Despite a growing body of research examining neural adaptations to resistance training, the contraction-dependent changes in neural activity and muscle strength following resistance training and long-term detraining have not been adequately discussed. This paper presents a narrative review of the existing literature on acute neural responses to various types of muscle contractions and neural adaptations to training and detraining. Available data show that acute neural adaptations are influenced by the specific types of muscle contractions performed, as neuromuscular activity differs between eccentric, concentric, and isometric contractions. Furthermore, resistance training with eccentric contraction leads to higher excitability at the level of the motor cortex, corticospinal tracts, and neuromuscular junction compared to concentric and isometric contraction. In addition, the neuromuscular adaptations and strength gains achieved by eccentric training were maintained over a long period of detraining compared to other types of muscle contraction. Eccentric contraction induces greater acute neural excitability and leads to increased and more long-lasting neural adaptations compared to other types of muscle contraction. Further studies are needed to confirm the effectiveness of the eccentric training program on neural adaptation.
... A notable finding was that although the concentric-only group performed double the number of concentric actions than the concentric and eccentric group, this did not lead to a greater increase in 3RM strength. Moreover, a similar increase in bench press estimated 1RM strength was achieved by eccentric-only training with an overloading method (i.e., 5 sets x 6 repetitions at 120 % 1RM) compared with concentric-only (i.e., 6 sets x 7 repetitions at 85% 1RM) and concentriceccentric (i.e., 4 sets x 5 repetitions at 90 % 1RM) training groups [36]. In this case, the eccentriconly training did not perform concentric actions throughout the training intervention and was more "naïve" to the testing action type. ...
... In this case, the eccentriconly training did not perform concentric actions throughout the training intervention and was more "naïve" to the testing action type. However, a similar increase in estimated 1RM strength was observed between the eccentric-only training and the groups that were repeatedly exposed to concentric actions [36]. ...
Article
Full-text available
The principle of specificity suggests that the largest changes in strength occur when training resembles the specific strength test. A one-repetition maximum (1RM) test, which tests the maximal concentric strength, is commonly used as a surrogate for strength adaptation. When separating muscle actions into concentric or eccentric phases, multiple lines of evidence suggest that eccentric muscle actions possess several distinct physiological properties compared with concentric actions. In accordance, there are instances where the increases in 1RM strength test were similar between eccentric-only and concentric-only resistance training. This is at odds with the principle of specificity which suggests that individuals who trained with concentric actions would be expected to have an advantage in that specific task. Although the mechanistic reasons why eccentric-biased training carries over to maximal concentric strength remains to be elucidated, the lack of discernible differences in strength gains with eccentrically-biased training (e.g., eccentric-only and accentuated eccentric training) may imply that the effects of eccentric loading in training are transferable to concentric strength. Our review revisits the role of eccentric loading in enhancing concentric maximal muscle strength. We also speculate on potential physiological factors (i.e., molecular and neural factors) that may differentiate the effects of eccentric and concentric resistance training on the changes in muscle strength. Currently, the majority of the studies investigating the changes in strength have been conducted using isokinetic eccentric training. This is important as there is a viewpoint that the magnitude of chronic adaptations with different modalities of eccentric exercises (i.e., isotonic, isokinetic, and isoinertial training) may also differ from each other. While it has been suggested that eccentric action has a greater transferable capacity for strength adaptations compared to concentric actions, future investigations are warranted to investigate with different modalities of eccentric exercises. There also remains a host of unanswered questions related to the role of eccentric action for maximal concentric strength. For example, future studies may examine whether the eccentric action would be additive when the training is already maximally loaded during the concentric action for increasing concentric maximal strength. We suggested a few different designs that could be used to answer some of these questions in future studies.
... Resistance training is widely used to increase strength and induce muscle hypertrophy [1,2] such as in sports and rehabilitation [3,4]. Depending on the goal, practitioners, physicians, and coaches should consider several characteristics of resistance training [5]. ...
Article
Full-text available
Purpose The current study compared the muscle excitation of the primary and stabilizer muscles during standing overhead press performed with either the barbell (barbell-OHP) or the kettlebells (kettlebell-OHP), using surface electromyography. Methods Ten male StrongFirst-certified instructors in the OHP, performed either the barbell-OHP or the kettlebell-OHP in a non-fatiguing set with an external load of 8-RM. Muscle excitation of the anterior deltoid, lateral deltoid, posterior deltoid, upper trapezius, triceps brachii, flexor carpi ulnaris, latissimus dorsi, rectus abdominis, external oblique, erector spinae and gluteus maximus was recorded during both the descending and the ascending phase. Results During the ascending phase, the kettlebell-OHP showed superior excitation of the flexor carpi ulnaris (p < 0.01, ES = 1.90), erector spinae (p = 0.04, ES = 0.71) and gluteus maximus (p < 0.01, ES = 1.00) while in the descending phase, the kettlebell-OHP exhibited superior excitation of the anterior deltoid (p = 0.04, ES = 0.69), upper trapezius (p = 0.04, ES = 0.69), flexor carpi ulnaris (p < 0.01, ES = 4.04) and erector spinae (p = 0.04, ES = 0.70). No between-exercise difference was observed for the lateral deltoid, posterior deltoid, triceps brachii, latissimus dorsi, rectus abdominis and external oblique. Conclusion The kettlebell-OHP may be more effective than the barbell-OHP in recruiting both primary movers and stabilizers, making it a potentially valuable addition to training for increased strength and rehabilitation benefits. However, the different barbell peculiarities make both resistances suitable for inclusion in a training routine.
... The load used during both traditional and CON-based resistance training depends on the maximal CON strength (i.e., based on one repetition maximum [1RM]) (13). On the other hand, ECC-based training allows for the use of supramaximal loads (i.e., greater than CON 1RM), thus altering the mechanical stimuli applied to the muscle (37). ...
Article
Full-text available
Different physiological mechanisms of sarcomere activity during eccentric (ECC) and concentric (CON) muscle actions led to investigations into muscle hypertrophy outcomes, but conclusions remain elusive. We aimed to investigate the effects of ECC vs. CON muscle actions on muscle hypertrophy in apparently healthy adults through a systematic review with meta-analysis. The searches were conducted on EMBASE, MEDLINE, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, Scopus, and SPORTDiscus databases. To be eligible for inclusion, studies had to: (a) be randomized/controlled trials; (b) investigate the effects of CON vs. ECC resistance training programs in apparently healthy adults; (c) assess hypertrophy outcomes using direct imaging for cross-sectional area, muscle thickness, or muscle volume. A total of 15,778 studies were identified, and 26 (682 subjects included in the meta-analysis) met the inclusion criteria. The main findings indicated no statistical difference between ECC vs. CON on hypertrophy measurements (0.285 [95% CI: 20.131 to 0.701]; p 5 0.179; I 2 : 84.4%; GRADE: very low). Subgroup meta-analysis analyzing possible hypertrophy outcome moderators as age (18-59 years old and $60 years old) and weeks of intervention duration (.8 weeks) did not reveal differences between ECC vs. CON. Subgroup analysis revealed an effect favoring the ECC for the upper limb muscles (p 5 0.018), #8 weeks of intervention (p 5 0.046), muscle thickness assessment (p 5 0.0352), and isokinetic contraction (p 5 0.0251). Our findings suggest similar hypertrophy between ECC and CON muscle actions in apparently healthy adults. However, it appears that the muscles of the upper limbs, shorter interventions, hypertrophy assessment method, and the contraction type may favor ECC muscle actions.
... Eccentric-only and traditional (cyclical concentriceccentric contractions) resistance training have demonstrated a superior ability to preserve muscular adaptations when compared to concentric-only training [21][22][23], suggesting that active lengthening of muscle is pivotal to eliciting sustainable adaptations, even in the untrained contralateral limb [24]. Recent work from our laboratory [25,26] confirmed the efficacy of eccentric-only resistance training to induce long-lasting improvements in lower-limb muscle function and size of older adults, indicated by significantly greater values than at pre-training following eight weeks of detraining. ...
Article
Full-text available
Background Eccentric resistance training elicits greater preservation of training-induced muscular adaptations compared with other training modalities, however the detraining profiles of different training dosages remain unknown. Aims To examine the detraining effects following once- or twice-weekly eccentric-specific resistance training in older adults. Methods Twenty-one older adults (age = 70.5 ± 6.0 year) completed a 12-week detraining period following the 12-week eccentric training programmes with neuromuscular function and muscle structure assessed six (mid-detraining) and 12 (post-detraining) weeks following training cessation. Results From post-training to post-detraining, no significant regression of the training-induced improvements (collapsed group data reported) occurred in power (0%), strength (eccentric = 0%, isometric = 39%), or explosive strength over numerous epochs (0–32%), resulting in values that remained significantly greater than at pre-training. However, significant regression in the improvements in muscle thickness (91%) and fascicle angle (100%) occurred, resulting in values that were not significantly greater than pre-training. Discussion The limited regression in neuromuscular function following a 12-week detraining period has important implications for supporting eccentric exercise prescription in older adults who often face periods of inactivity. However, further work is required to develop an effective maintenance dosage strategy that preserves improvements in muscle structure. Conclusions Eccentric resistance training elicits improvements in the neuromuscular function of older adults, which are sustained for at least 12 weeks after eccentric training cessation.
... E xercise is an important therapeutic agent prescribed to induce positive effects on health-related parameters (50), such as reducing body fat, adding lean body mass (LBM), improving self-esteem, and increasing functional capacity (8,10). However, the amount of exercise typically performed by most people (7) falls short of the minimum recommended doses to induce positive adaptations related to overall fitness (38). ...
Article
Whole-body electromyostimulation training (WB-EMS) has gained increasing popularity as a training method in recent years. This brief review aims to summarize the potential benefits and risks of WB-EMS in many different populations and purposes. The findings of this review suggest that WB-EMS is particularly effective for improving muscle mass and strength outcomes in untrained people. However, more high-quality studies are needed to determine its long-term effects and to optimize its use in different populations and training contexts. For general health-related parameters, WB-EMS may be a feasible and time-efficient exercise strategy combined with proper energy or protein intake throughout longer periods.
... The load used during both traditional and CON-based resistance training depends on the maximal CON strength (i.e., based on one repetition maximum [1RM]) (13). On the other hand, ECC-based training allows for the use of supramaximal loads (i.e., greater than CON 1RM), thus altering the mechanical stimuli applied to the muscle (37). ...
... A report by Giuseppe Coratella et al concluded that when the subjects were trained for eccentric-only exercise, the bench press 1RM had a remarkable development after six weeks(p<0.05) [19]. In the present study, there was a remarkable improvement on 1RM (p=0.0180) with an average 1RM as 4.36±0.72kg ...
Article
Full-text available
Dental professionals require job-related physical demands that may lead to forearm weakness. This can make tasks involving gripping, lifting, and manipulating objects challenging. Hence, the study aims to investigate the impact of eccentric strengthening and grip strengthening for forearm weakness in individuals of dental practices. In the current study, 53 individuals met the inclusion criteria and provided their consent to participate. The individuals taking part in the study were assigned to two different groups, namely Group A and Group B, Group A(27) received the Eccentric exercise and Group B (26) received the Grip Strength exercise. The results of assessments for categories were assessed with an inch tape to measure the forearm circumference and 1 RM with the dumbbell. Two different sets of exercises were given to groups A and B for 5 days each week over a 4-week period. Individuals in dental practices with forearm weakness showed significant differences in the effectiveness of treatment between Group A and Group B. Both training methods were useful at increasing strength. The study results revealed a significant increase in the functional status of the forearm and optimum strength of grasp in the group A. During the dentists' training, eccentric strength therapy significantly increased their forearm strength.
... Bench press (BP) is widely used in resistance training to stimulate the upper-body muscles. Several studies have examined its technique and prime movers (1,4) or the long-term training adaptations following different protocols of BP training (3,20). With the intent to increase the load and vary the stimuli, practitioners often adopt different strategies, such as adapting the bench inclination (4), increasing or decreasing the handgrip stance (14), or accentuating the dorsal arch while performing BP (27). ...
Article
Full-text available
Bartolomei, S, Caroli, E, Coloretti, V, Rosaci, G, Cortesi, M, and Coratella, G. Flat-back vs. arched-back bench press: Examining the different techniques performed by power athletes. J Strength Cond Res XX(X): 000–000, 2024—The International Powerlifting Federation recently changed the regulations concerning the bench press (BP) technique, not allowing an accentuated dorsal arch anymore. We investigated the difference between the flat-back vs. arched-back BP performed by competitive powerlifters as concerns the following parameters: (a) 1 repetition maximum (1RM) and barbell displacement; (b) mean and peak barbell velocity and power, and (c) the excitation of the prime movers. Fifteen highly resistance trained individuals (BP 1RM/body mass ratio: 1.38 ± 0.18) performed the flat-back and arched-back BP at their 50, 70, and 90% of the respective 1RM and performed each lift with the intent to maximally accelerate the barbell. Barbell displacement and velocity, power, and the excitation of the upper and lower pectoralis and triceps brachii were assessed. The 1RM was greater with the arched-back BP (+4.2 Kg, 95% confidence intervals + 0.0/+8.4, effect size [ES]: 0.22), whereas the barbell displacement was greater with the flat-back BP for all loads (ES from 0.40 to 0.61). Greater mean (+0.052 m·s ⁻¹ , 0.016/0.088, ES: 0.42) and peak barbell velocity (+0.068 m·s ⁻¹ , +0.026/0.110, ES: 0.27) were observed in the flat-back BP, whereas power did not differ. The excitation of upper and lower pectoralis was similar, while an overall trend for an increased activation of triceps brachii was noted in the arched-back vs. flat-back BP. Interestingly, no between-load difference in the excitation of upper and lower pectoralis was observed ( p > 0.05). Depending on the training purposes, both flat-back and arched-back BP may be used. The present outcomes may assist practitioners and competitive powerlifters to inform training session.
Article
Full-text available
Background Based on emerging evidence that brief periods of cessation from resistance training (RT) may re-sensitize muscle to anabolic stimuli, we aimed to investigate the effects of a 1-week deload interval at the midpoint of a 9-week RT program on muscular adaptations in resistance-trained individuals. Methods Thirty-nine young men ( n = 29) and women ( n = 10) were randomly assigned to 1 of 2 experimental, parallel groups: An experimental group that abstained from RT for 1 week at the midpoint of a 9-week, high-volume RT program (DELOAD) or a traditional training group that performed the same RT program continuously over the study period (TRAD). The lower body routines were directly supervised by the research staff while upper body training was carried out in an unsupervised fashion. Muscle growth outcomes included assessments of muscle thickness along proximal, mid and distal regions of the middle and lateral quadriceps femoris as well as the mid-region of the triceps surae. Adaptions in lower body isometric and dynamic strength, local muscular endurance of the quadriceps, and lower body muscle power were also assessed. Results Results indicated no appreciable differences in increases of lower body muscle size, local endurance, and power between groups. Alternatively, TRAD showed greater improvements in both isometric and dynamic lower body strength compared to DELOAD. Additionally, TRAD showed some slight psychological benefits as assessed by the readiness to train questionnaire over DELOAD. Conclusion In conclusion, our findings suggest that a 1-week deload period at the midpoint of a 9-week RT program appears to negatively influence measures of lower body muscle strength but has no effect on lower body hypertrophy, power or local muscular endurance.
Article
Full-text available
The purpose of this study was to investigate the effect of hypertrophy-type resistance training (RT) on upper limb fatigue resistance in young adult men and women. Fifty-eight men (22.7±3.7 years, 70.6±9.3 kg, and 176.8±6.4 cm) and 65 women (21.6±3.7 years, 58.8±11.9 kg, and 162.6±6.2 cm) underwent RT for 16 weeks. Training consisted of 10-12 whole body exercises with 3 sets of 8-12 repetitions maximum performed 3 times per week. Before and after the RT intervention participants were submitted to 1RM testing, as well as a fatigue protocol consisting of 4 sets at 80% 1RM on bench press (BP) and arm curl (AC). The sum of the number of repetitions accomplished in the 4 sets in each exercise was used to indicate fatigue resistance. There was a significant (p
Article
Full-text available
We recently reported that the greatest distinguishing feature between eccentric (ECC) and concentric (CON) muscle loading lays in architectural adaptations: ECC favors increases in fascicle length (Lf), associated with distal vastus lateralis muscle (VL) hypertrophy, and CON increases in pennation angle (PA). Here, we explored the interactions between structural and morphological remodeling, assessed by ultrasound and dual x-ray absorptiometry (DXA), and long-term muscle protein synthesis (MPS), evaluated by deuterium oxide (D2O) tracing technique. Ten young males (23 ± 4 years) performed unilateral resistance exercise training (RET) three times/week for 4 weeks; thus, one-leg trained concentrically while the contralateral performed ECC exercise only at 80% of either CON or ECC one repetition maximum (1RM). Subjects consumed an initial bolus of D2O (150 mL), while a 25-mL dose was thereafter provided every 8 days. Muscle biopsies from VL midbelly (MID) and distal myotendinous junction (MTJ) were collected at 0 and 4-weeks. MPS was then quantified via GC–pyrolysis–IRMS over the 4-week training period. Expectedly, ECC and CON RET resulted in similar increases in VL muscle thickness (MT) (7.5% vs. 8.4%, respectively) and thigh lean mass (DXA) (2.3% vs. 3%, respectively), albeit through distinct remodeling: Lf increasing more after ECC (5%) versus CON (2%) and PA increasing after CON (7% vs. 3%). MPS did not differ between contractile modes or biopsy sites (MID-ECC: 1.42 vs. MID-CON: 1.4% day−1; MTJ-ECC: 1.38 vs. MTJ-CON: 1.39% day−1). Muscle thickness at MID site increased similarly following ECC and CON RET, reflecting a tendency for a contractile mode-independent correlation between MPS and MT (P = 0.07; R2 = 0.18). We conclude that, unlike MT, distinct structural remodeling responses to ECC or CON are not reflected in MPS; the molecular mechanisms of distinct protein deposition, and/or the role of protein breakdown in mediating these responses remain to be defined. © 2015 The Authors. Physiological Reports published by Wiley Periodicals, Inc. on behalf of the American Physiological Society and The Physiological Society.
Article
Full-text available
Unlabelled: We recently reported that the greatest distinguishing feature between eccentric (ECC) and concentric (CON) muscle loading lays in architectural adaptations: ECC favors increases in fascicle length (Lf), associated with distal vastus lateralis muscle (VL) hypertrophy, and CON increases in pennation angle (PA). Here, we explored the interactions between structural and morphological remodeling, assessed by ultrasound and dual x-ray absorptiometry (DXA), and long-term muscle protein synthesis (MPS), evaluated by deuterium oxide (D2O) tracing technique. Ten young males (23 ± 4 years) performed unilateral resistance exercise training (RET) three times/week for 4 weeks; thus, one-leg trained concentrically while the contralateral performed ECC exercise only at 80% of either CON or ECC one repetition maximum (1RM). Subjects consumed an initial bolus of D2O (150 mL), while a 25-mL dose was thereafter provided every 8 days. Muscle biopsies from VL midbelly (MID) and distal myotendinous junction (MTJ) were collected at 0 and 4-weeks. MPS was then quantified via GC-pyrolysis-IRMS over the 4-week training period. Expectedly, ECC and CON RET resulted in similar increases in VL muscle thickness (MT) (7.5% vs. 8.4%, respectively) and thigh lean mass (DXA) (2.3% vs. 3%, respectively), albeit through distinct remodeling: Lf increasing more after ECC (5%) versus CON (2%) and PA increasing after CON (7% vs. 3%). MPS did not differ between contractile modes or biopsy sites (MID-ECC: 1.42 vs. Mid-con: 1.4% day(-1); MTJ-ECC: 1.38 vs. Mtj-con: 1.39% day(-1)). Muscle thickness at MID site increased similarly following ECC and CON RET, reflecting a tendency for a contractile mode-independent correlation between MPS and MT (P = 0.07; R(2) = 0.18). We conclude that, unlike MT, distinct structural remodeling responses to ECC or CON are not reflected in MPS; the molecular mechanisms of distinct protein deposition, and/or the role of protein breakdown in mediating these responses remain to be defined.
Article
Full-text available
The aim of this study was to evaluate the effects of unilateral eccentric training using constant velocity or constant external load on untrained limb. Forty-nine participants were randomized in isokinetic (IK), dynamic constant external resistance (DCER) unilateral eccentric training or control groups. Knee-extension 1RM and isometric, eccentric and concentric knee extensors' peak torques, as well as changes in vastus lateralis muscle thickness, fascicle length, pennation angle and quadriceps fat-free mass were measured. After training, both IK and DCER similarly increased over time 1RM (respectively, ?3.6 kg, CI 95 % 0.6–6.5 and ?4.3 kg, CI 95 % 1.6–6.9), concentric (respectively, ?8.4 N/m, CI 95 % 0.0 to ?16.4 and 9.8 CI 95 % 0.6–19.2), eccentric (respectively, ?28.5 N/m, CI 95 % 11.0 to ?46.0 and 21.1 CI 95 % 15.1–37.0), and isometric (respectively, ?15.4 N/m, CI 95 % 0.7–30.0 and ?13.9, CI 95 % 0.3–27.5) peak torques. No increase was found for vastus lateralis muscle thickness , fascicle length, pennation angle and quadriceps fat-free mass. Eccentric training was effective for inducing strength, but not structural, adaptations in untrained limb. Both in rehabilitation and training practice, use of easily available gym devices can be a good substitute for expensive and often unavailable isokinetic devices.
Article
Full-text available
Aim of the study was to compare the effects of unilateral eccentric-only training using constant velocity vs. constant external load. Forty-seven participants were randomized in isokinetic (IK), dynamic constant external resistance (DCER) unilateral eccentric training or control groups. Knee extension 1RM and isometric, eccentric and concentric knee extensors peak torque, as well as changes in vastus lateralis fascicle pennation angle, fascicle length, muscle thickness, and quadriceps fat-free mass were measured. Both IK and DCER training consisted in 5 × 8 eccentric-only repetitions, 2d/w, for 6 weeks. IK and DCER training sessions were matched for total volume. After training, both IK and DCER similarly increased 1RM (respectively, +4.4 kg, CI95% 1.8-7.0 and +5.5 kg, CI95% 3.3-7.9), isometric (respectively, +34.5 N/m, CI95% 23.0-45.9 and +15.8, CI95% 5.4-26.2) and concentric peak torque (respectively, +17.0 N/m, CI95% 6.6 to +27.4 and 12.2 CI95% 2.8-21.7). IK increased eccentric peak torque significantly more than DCER (respectively, +84.2 N/m, CI95% 66.3-102.1 and +38.2 N/m, CI95% 21.9-54.4). Both IK and DCER similarly increased fascicle length (respectively, +14.7 mm, CI95% 5.4-24.0 and +14.4 mm, CI95% 5.4-23.3) and muscle thickness (respectively, +3.3 mm, CI95% 1.5-5.1, and +4.1 mm, CI95% 2.5-5.7). Matching the training volume resulted in similar adaptations comparing eccentric-only IK or DCER resistance training. Both in rehabilitation and in training practice, the use of easily available gym devices can be a good substitute for expensive and often unavailable IK devices.
Article
Full-text available
It is generally accepted that neural factors play an important role in muscle strength gains. This article reviews the neural adaptations in strength, with the goal of laying the foundations for practical applications in sports medicine and rehabilitation. An increase in muscular strength without noticeable hypertrophy is the first line of evidence for neural involvement in acquisition of muscular strength. The use of surface electromyographic (SEMG) techniques reveal that strength gains in the early phase of a training regimen are associated with an increase in the amplitude of SEMG activity. This has been interpreted as an increase in neural drive, which denotes the magnitude of efferent neural output from the CNS to active muscle fibres. However, SEMG activity is a global measure of muscle activity. Underlying alterations in SEMG activity are changes in motor unit firing patterns as measured by indwelling (wire or needle) electrodes. Some studies have reported a transient increase in motor unit firing rate. Training-related increases in the rate of tension development have also been linked with an increased probability of doublet firing in individual motor units. A doublet is a very short interspike interval in a motor unit train, and usually occurs at the onset of a muscular contraction. Motor unit synchronisation is another possible mechanism for increases in muscle strength, but has yet to be definitely demonstrated. There are several lines of evidence for central control of training-related adaptation to resistive exercise. Mental practice using imagined contractions has been shown to increase the excitability of the cortical areas involved in movement and motion planning. However, training using imagined contractions is unlikely to be as effective as physical training, and it may be more applicable to rehabilitation. Retention of strength gains after dissipation of physiological effects demonstrates a strong practice effect. Bilateral contractions are associated with lower SEMG and strength compared with unilateral contractions of the same muscle group. SEMG magnitude is lower for eccentric contractions than for concentric contractions. However, resistive training can reverse these trends. The last line of evidence presented involves the notion that unilateral resistive exercise of a specific limb will also result in training effects in the unexercised contralateral limb (cross-transfer or cross-education). Peripheral involvement in training-related strength increases is much more uncertain. Changes in the sensory receptors (i.e. Golgi tendon organs) may lead to disinhibition and an increased expression of muscular force. Agonist muscle activity results in limb movement in the desired direction, while antagonist activity opposes that motion. Both decreases and increases in co-activation of the antagonist have been demonstrated. A reduction in antagonist co-activation would allow increased expression of agonist muscle force, while an increase in antagonist co-activation is important for maintaining the integrity of the joint. Thus far, it is not clear what the CNS will optimise: force production or joint integrity. The following recommendations are made by the authors based on the existing literature. Motor learning theory and imagined contractions should be incorporated into strength-training practice. Static contractions at greater muscle lengths will transfer across more joint angles. Submaximal eccentric contractions should be used when there are issues of muscle pain, detraining or limb immobilisation. The reversal of antagonists (antagonist-to-agonist) proprioceptive neuromuscular facilitation contraction pattern would be useful to increase the rate of tension development in older adults, thus serving as an important prophylactic in preventing falls. When evaluating the neural changes induced by strength training using EMG recording, antagonist EMG activity should always be measured and evaluated.
Article
Full-text available
Purpose This study compared the exercise induced muscle damage and repeated bout effect after isoload vs isokinetic eccentric supra-maximal single session. Methods Thirty sport science male students were ran-domly divided in isokinetic (IK) and isoload (IL) eccentric training. Creatin kinase (CK) serum activity, muscle sore-ness and strength decrement measured both in dynamic and isometric modalities were recorded at baseline, immedi-ately after and up to 4 days following 48 supramaximal IK or IL eccentric contractions. Same protocol was repeated after 4 weeks. A three-way repeated measures ANOVA was used to detect differences in dependent variables comparing group 9 bout 9 time. Results No three-way interaction occurred in dependent variables. Bout 9 time resulted in a significant interaction in all dependent variables. Muscle damage markers resul-ted significantly altered compared to baseline up to 4 days. However, IL showed significantly greater CK, muscle soreness and strength deficit compared to IK. All parame-ters were significantly reduced after second compared to first bout. Difference between IL and IK after second bout was not overall significant. Conclusion IK vs IL supra-maximal eccentric contraction is showed to have different muscle damage symptoms. Protection conferred by first bout reduced muscle damage after 4 weeks and decreased difference between IL and IK.
Article
Memory is a process in which information is encoded, stored, and retrieved. For vertebrates, the modern view has been that it occurs only in the brain. This review describes a cellular memory in skeletal muscle in which hypertrophy is 'remembered' such that a fibre that has previously been large, but subsequently lost its mass, can regain mass faster than naive fibres. A new cell biological model based on the literature, with the most reliable methods for identifying myonuclei, can explain this phenomenon. According to this model, previously untrained fibres recruit myonuclei from activated satellite cells before hypertrophic growth. Even if subsequently subjected to grave atrophy, the higher number of myonuclei is retained, and the myonuclei seem to be protected against the elevated apoptotic activity observed in atrophying muscle tissue. Fibres that have acquired a higher number of myonuclei grow faster when subjected to overload exercise, thus the nuclei represent a functionally important 'memory' of previous strength. This memory might be very long lasting in humans, as myonuclei are stable for at least 15 years and might even be permanent. However, myonuclei are harder to recruit in the elderly, and if the long-lasting muscle memory also exists in humans, one should consider early strength training as a public health advice. In addition, myonuclei are recruited during steroid use and encode a muscle memory, at least in rodents. Thus, extending the exclusion time for doping offenders should be considered.
Article
This study determined the contribution of extracellular matrix (ECM) remodeling to the protective adaptation of human skeletal muscle known as the repeated-bout effect (RBE). Muscle biopsies were obtained 3 hours, 2 days, and 27 days following an initial bout (B1) of lengthening contractions (LCs) and 2 days following a repeated bout (B2) in 2 separate studies. Biopsies from the nonexercised legs served as controls. In the first study, global transcriptomic analysis indicated widespread changes in ECM structural, deadhesive, and signaling transcripts, 3 hours following LC. To determine if ECM remodeling is involved in the RBE, we conducted a second study by use of a repeated-bout paradigm. TNC immunoreactivity increased 10.8-fold following B1, was attenuated following B2, and positively correlated with LC-induced strength loss (r(2) = 0.45; P = 0.009). Expression of collagen I, III, and IV (COL1A1, COL3A1, COL4A1) transcripts was unchanged early but increased 5.7 ± 2.5-, 3.2 ± 0.9-, and 2.1 ± 0.4-fold (P < 0.05), respectively, 27 days post-B1 and were unaffected by B2. Likewise, TGF-β signaling demonstrated a delayed response following LC. Satellite cell content increased 80% (P < 0.05) 2 days post-B1 (P < 0.05), remained elevated 27 days post-B1, and was unaffected by B2. Collectively, the data suggest sequential ECM remodeling characterized by early deadhesion and delayed reconstructive activity that appear to contribute to the RBE.-Hyldahl, R. D., Nelson, B., Xin, L., Welling, T., Groscost, L., Hubal, M. J., Chipkin, S., Clarkson, P. M., Parcell, A. C. Extracellular matrix remodeling and its contribution to protective adaptation following lengthening contractions in human muscle. © FASEB.